The Opium Monopoly

Note: Project Gutenberg also has an HTML version of this file which includes the original illustrations. See 33479-h.htm or 33479-h.zip: (https://www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/33479/pg33479-images.html) or (https://www.gutenberg.org/files/33479/33479-h.zip)

Images of the original pages are available through Internet Archive/Canadian Libraries. See http://www.archive.org/details/opiummonopoly00lamouoft

THE OPIUM MONOPOLY

* * * * *

THE MACMILLAN COMPANY

NEW YORK . BOSTON . CHICAGO . DALLAS ATLANTA . SAN FRANCISCO

MACMILLAN & CO., LIMITED

LONDON . BOMBAY . CALCUTTA MELBOURNE

THE MACMILLAN CO. OF CANADA, LTD.

TORONTO

* * * * *

[Illustration: Wrapper of packet of opium, as sold in licensed opium shops of Singapore. Each packet contains enough opium for about six smokes.]

THE OPIUM MONOPOLY

by

ELLEN N. LA MOTTE

Author of "Backwash of War," "Peking Dust," "Civilization," Etc.

New York The Macmillan Company 1920

All rights reserved

Copyright, 1920 By The Macmillan Company

Set up and electrotyped. Published January, 1920.

"If this was our battle, if these were our ends, Which were our enemies, which were our friends?"

Witter Bynner, in The Nation.

CONTENTS

CHAPTER PAGE

INTRODUCTION ix

I. GREAT BRITAIN'S OPIUM MONOPOLY 1

II. THE INDIAN OPIUM MONOPOLY 6

III. JAPAN AS AN OPIUM DISTRIBUTOR 11

IV. SINGAPORE 18

V. THE STRAITS SETTLEMENTS OPIUM COMMISSION 23

VI. OPIUM IN SIAM 26

VII. HONGKONG 30

VIII. SARAWAK 35

IX. SHANGHAI 37

X. INDIA 44

XI. TURKEY AND PERSIA 54

XII. MAURETIUS 56

XIII. BRITISH NORTH BORNEO 58

XIV. BRITISH GUIANA 62

XV. HISTORY OF THE OPIUM TRADE IN CHINA 65

XVI. CONCLUSION 73

INTRODUCTION

We first became interested in the opium traffic during a visit to the Far East in 1916. Like most Americans, we had vaguely heard of this trade, and had still vaguer recollections of a war between Great Britain and China, which took place about seventy-five years ago, known as the Opium War. From time to time we had heard of the opium trade as still flourishing in China, and then later came reports and assurances that it was all over, accompanied by newspaper pictures of bonfires of opium and opium pipes. Except for these occasional and incidental memories, we had neither knowledge of, nor interest in the subject. On our way out to Japan, in the July of 1916, we met a young Hindu on the boat, who was outspoken and indignant over the British policy of establishing the opium trade in India, as one of the departments of the Indian Government. Of all phases of British rule in India, it was this policy which excited him most, and which caused him most ardently to wish that India had some form of self-government, some voice in the control and management of her own affairs, so that the country could protect itself from this evil. Without this, he declared, his country was powerless to put a stop to this traffic imposed upon it by a foreign government, and he greatly deplored the slow, but steady demoralization of the nation which was in consequence taking place. As he produced his facts and figures, showing what this meant to his people--this gradual undermining of their moral fiber and economic efficiency--we grew more and more interested. That such conditions existed were to us unheard of, and unbelievable. It seemed incredible that in this age, with the consensus of public opinion sternly opposed to the sale and distribution of habit-forming drugs, and with legislation to curb and restrict such practices incorporated in the laws of all ethical and civilized governments, that here, on the other side of the world, we should come upon opium traffic conducted as a government monopoly. Not only that, but conducted by one of the greatest and most highly civilized nations of the world, a nation which we have always looked up to as being in the very forefront of advanced, progressive and humane ideals. So shocked were we by what this young Hindu told us, that we flatly refused to believe him. We listened to what he had to say on the subject, but thinking that however earnest he might be, however sincere in his sense of outrage at such a policy, that he must of necessity be mistaken. We decided not to take his word for it, but to look into the matter for ourselves.